White, English-Speaking Migrant Writers in Australia Ingeborg Van Teeseling University of Wollongong
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Wollongong Research Online University of Wollongong Thesis Collection University of Wollongong Thesis Collections 2011 Literary migrations: white, English-speaking migrant writers in Australia Ingeborg van Teeseling University of Wollongong Recommended Citation Teeseling, Ingeborg van, Literary migrations: white, English-speaking migrant writers in Australia, Doctor of Philosophy thesis, English Literatures Program, University of Wollongong, 2011. http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/3394 Research Online is the open access institutional repository for the University of Wollongong. For further information contact Manager Repository Services: [email protected]. LITERARY MIGRATIONS: WHITE, ENGLISH-SPEAKING MIGRANT WRITERS IN AUSTRALIA A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of the degree Doctor of Philosophy from the UNIVERSITY OF WOLLONGONG by Ingeborg van Teeseling, BA Hons Utrecht University, The Netherlands Faculty of Arts English Literatures Program 2011 THESIS CERTIFICATION CERTIFICATION I, Ingeborg van Teeseling, declare that this thesis, submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the award of Doctor of Philisophy, in the Faculty of Arts, English Literatures Program, University of Wollongong, is wholly my own work unless otherwise referenced or acknowledged. The document has not been submitted for qualifications at any other academic institution. Ingeborg van Teeseling 20 September, 2011 “Thinking makes it so” William Shakespeare, Hamlet, act 2, scene 2 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS My profound gratitude goes out to Tony Simoes da Silva, Paul Sharrad, Wenche Ommundsen, Narelle Campbell, Debbie Jensen, Kerry Ross, Paul Franssen, Veerle Ultee, Harm van de Ven, Margaret Hanlon, Georgine Clarsen, Ingeborg Brounts, Steven van Teeseling, Jacqueline de Gier, Gerdie Snellers, Liselot von Barnau Sythoff, Brecht van Teeseling, Sophie Williams, Maureen Gillis, Alex Miller, John Mateer and my colleagues. Without Hasse van Nunen and Jim Gillis this thesis would not exist. In memory of Ed van Teeseling ABSTRACT Starting with a false premise can get you into all sorts of trouble. In Australia, a migrant is not necessarily somebody who has migrated to this country. People who have been born here, but look or sound different, are often referred to as ‘second’- or ‘third generation’ migrants. At the same time white, English-speaking migrants are generally not seen as migrants at all. Literal meaning is swallowed into or distorted by perceptions of a national cultural ‘core and periphery’ and institutionalised discourse, centered on multiculturalism. In this thesis I am arguing that it is this false core/periphery binary that has made a particular group of migrants ,– those who are white and have migrated from English-speaking countries – invisible – invisible as migrants, that is. For the writers within this group, this leads to critical blindness in relation to their work and place within Australian national literature. As a critic however, I look at the work of Ruth Park, Alex Miller and John Mateer and see it is profoundly influenced by their migrant experience. More often than not they write about themes that are typical of migrant writing: alienation, identity, belonging, home, being in- between cultures, history. For a more appropriate, complete appreciation of their work, this thesis argues it is imperative to go back to the beginning and return the ‘default setting’ of migrant to its literal meaning. CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Chapter 2: Social Contexts 14 1. The problem with ‘multiculturalism’ 14 2. Critical Multiculturalism 21 3. Ethnicity and race 23 4. Culture and difference 25 5. White, English-speaking migrant groups in Australia: sibling rivalry? 30 6. Migrancy and national identity 35 7. Whiteness 38 Chapter 3: The History of Migrant, Ethnic, and Multicultural literature In Australia 44 1. 1963-1979 44 2. 1980-1990 49 3. 1991 56 4. 1992-1994 60 5. 1995-1996 65 6. 1996-2002 67 7. 2003-2007 70 8. 2007-2010 72 Chapter 4: Literary Issues, Especially the Role of the Author 76 1. Barthes, Foucault, Bennett and Sontag 76 2. Before Barthes 80 3. Feminism, New Historicism, Cultural Materialism and Migrant Writing 83 4. Migrant Themes (General) 89 5. Migrant Themes in Literature by White, English- speaking, Migrant Writers 94 6. Language 98 Chapter 5: Ruth Park: A Voice for Other Outsiders Inside 103 Chapter 6: Alex Miller: The Story of the Intimate and Private Lives Of Us 133 Chapter 7: John Mateer: Lost for Words 177 Chapter 8: Conclusion 217 Works Cited: 229 Appendix 1: Unpublished Interview with Alex Miller 270 Appendix 2: Unpublished Interview with John Mateer 282 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION One wintry afternoon I was on my way back home after picking up my then four-year old daughter from school. It was late, it was raining, I had a tired child on the front seat of my bike and two bags of groceries on the back. In short: I wanted to get inside, and fast. So the last couple of hundred meters of our trip I navigated my bike onto the footpath, to cut a few precious minutes off our trip. Immediately Hasse started to wail at the top of her lungs. When I asked her, slightly irritated, what was wrong, she told me that by cycling on the footpath I would ultimately be responsible for her death - because, the argument went: cycling here was illegal, so of course a policeman would come to arrest me; I would be taken away; she would have to go home alone. She was hungry and cold, but she didn’t know how to work the stove yet, or the heater, or the phone, to call somebody who did. So she would sit alone in our house without food or warmth. This, because of the seriousness of my offence, would take days and days. So by the time I would be released, she would have died a slow and horrible death. This, of course, would be my fault, and caused by me cycling on the footpath. Bad mother! You could call it a fallacy, but to my four-year old it made complete and utter sense. One fact followed by ruthless logic had generated an entire narrative. It wasn’t that reality did not allow alternatives, but, as Hamlet once said: “Thinking makes it so” (Shakespeare 2005, p 53). Starting with a false premise can get you into all sorts of trouble, which is, in essence, what this thesis is about. In Australia, a migrant is not necessarily somebody who has migrated to this country. People who have been born here, but look (or sound) different, are often called second- or third generation migrants. At the same time white, English-speaking migrants are generally not seen as 2 migrants at all. Literal meaning is swallowed up into or distorted by perceptions of a national cultural core and non-core, as well as institutionalised discourse centered on multiculturalism. When I came to Australia in 2006, one of the first things I realised was that I would never become a ‘real’ Australian and would always remain an outsider in the eyes of the people who were born here. The next recognition was that although that was the case, I would, in time, be considered more Australian than some people who have been born here. For most Australians I met, my accent and name were enough to position me as a foreigner. On the other hand, the fact that I looked like the average Australian – white, blond, of European descent – made me more part of what is considered the ‘core’ than some of my fellow students and friends, who were born in this country, but had Lebanese or Vietnamese heritage. They had something I ‘lacked’: colour. I quickly found out that this issue of visibility is particularly important in the case of migrants. In my country of origin, Holland, anybody who does not speak Dutch is considered a migrant. It is not the most subtle of divisions, but usually it is factually fairly accurate. In Holland, of course, it is easier to draw this conclusion, because Dutch is not the world-language English is. If you speak Dutch, there is a good chance that you are Dutch as well. So most people who do not, are not. In Australia, language is used as a measuring stick to determine migrancy as well, but in this country the results seem to be even less exact and more fraught. Here there appears to be a scale to determine the amount of outsidership. Firstly, there is the group who speaks no English or very poor English. Then there are people like me, whose first language is not English, but who manage to get to the level of near-native- with-an-accent. The third group consists of people who are bi-lingual, but whose English does not sound Australian. Yet another group contains everybody whose first language is English, but a different kind of English. There are gradations in this group, varying from Americans and New Zealanders to English and Scottish. Complicating this already complex system of difference, as I suggested above, is colour. Simplistically speaking, in Australia, being visibly different from the above- mentioned core means that white Australians presume you are a foreigner, a migrant. Once that assumption has been made, there is apparently little prospect of changing your categorisation. I learned there were categories called ‘second’ or ‘third’ generation migrants, including people who were born here, but who had a visibly different heritage. Coming from Holland, this did not make sense to me at all. Soon I 3 also realised that there were consequences to this classification system. People who were considered the most foreign, because of their accent and/or colour, were also considered the most different. This difference came with a constant request to explain identity, provenance and purpose for being in Australia.